Bellezza Club Japan Co Ltd v Matsumura Akihiko: Enforcement of Foreign Judgment
Bellezza Club Japan Co Ltd sued Matsumura Akihiko in the Singapore High Court to enforce a judgment obtained in the Tokyo District Court, which was upheld by the Tokyo High Court and the Supreme Court of Japan. The High Court dismissed Matsumura's appeal against the Assistant Registrar's decision to grant summary judgment to Bellezza Club Japan Co Ltd. The court found that the Tokyo judgment was final and conclusive and that none of Matsumura's arguments raised a triable issue.
1. Case Overview
1.1 Court
High Court1.2 Outcome
Appeal Dismissed
1.3 Case Type
Civil
1.4 Judgment Type
Grounds of Decision
1.5 Jurisdiction
Singapore
1.6 Description
Singapore High Court enforced a Japanese judgment against Akihiko Matsumura, dismissing his appeal based on arguments of non-finality and public policy.
1.7 Decision Date
2. Parties and Outcomes
| Party Name | Role | Type | Outcome | Outcome Type | Counsels |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matsumura Akihiko | Defendant, Appellant | Individual | Appeal Dismissed | Lost | |
| Bellezza Club Japan Co Ltd | Plaintiff, Respondent | Corporation | Appeal Dismissed | Won |
3. Judges
| Judge Name | Title | Delivered Judgment |
|---|---|---|
| Belinda Ang Saw Ean | Judge | Yes |
4. Counsels
| Counsel Name | Organization |
|---|---|
| Zheng Sicong | Rajah & Tann LLP |
| Nanda Kumar | Rajah & Tann LLP |
| Alma Yong | Lee & Lee |
| Amelia Ang | Lee & Lee |
4. Facts
- The plaintiff obtained a judgment against the first defendant in the Tokyo District Court.
- The Tokyo judgment was upheld on appeal to the Tokyo High Court and the Supreme Court of Japan.
- The plaintiff brought an action in Singapore to enforce the Tokyo judgment.
- The first defendant resisted the application for summary judgment on several grounds, including that the Tokyo judgment was not final and conclusive.
- The first defendant also argued that enforcement of the Tokyo judgment would be against the public policy of Singapore.
- The first defendant claimed an equitable set-off based on a counterclaim in a separate action in Japan.
- The plaintiff had already enforced the Tokyo judgment in Japan and obtained partial satisfaction of the judgment sum and interest.
5. Formal Citations
- Bellezza Club Japan Co Ltd v Matsumura Akihiko and others, Suit No 173 of 2009 (Registrar's Appeal No 264 of 2009), [2010] SGHC 94
6. Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| Judgment obtained in the Tokyo District Court | |
| Action started by D1 in the Nagoya District Court | |
| Action commenced by the plaintiff in the Tokyo District Court | |
| D1’s appeal to the Tokyo High Court was dismissed | |
| Appeal to the Supreme Court of Japan was dismissed | |
| Action commenced in Singapore for the outstanding judgment sum and interest | |
| Plaintiff obtained summary judgment | |
| Affidavit filed on behalf of D1 | |
| Plaintiff’s affidavit in reply filed | |
| D1’s appeal against the order of the Assistant Registrar was dismissed | |
| Appeal dismissed |
7. Legal Issues
- Enforcement of Foreign Judgment
- Outcome: The court held that the Tokyo judgment was final and conclusive and that none of the arguments raised by the defendant constituted a valid defense to its enforcement.
- Category: Substantive
- Sub-Issues:
- Finality of foreign judgment
- Public policy exception to enforcement
- Equitable set-off
- Related Cases:
- [2002] 1 SLR(R) 515
- (1870) LR 6 QB 139
- (1883) 13 QBD 302
- [1967] 1 AC 853
- (1889) 15 App Cas 1
- (1863) 15 CB (NS) 341; 143 ER 817
- [2002] NSWSC 15
- [2008] SGHC 13
8. Remedies Sought
- Enforcement of Foreign Judgment
- Monetary Damages
9. Cause of Actions
- Enforcement of Foreign Judgment
10. Practice Areas
- Commercial Litigation
11. Industries
- No industries specified
12. Cited Cases
| Case Name | Court | Affirmed | Citation | Jurisdiction | Significance |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hong Pian Tee v Les Placements Germain Gauthier Inc | Court of Appeal | Yes | [2002] 1 SLR(R) 515 | Singapore | Cited for the principle that a foreign judgment in personam given by a foreign court of competent jurisdiction may be enforced by an action for the amount due under it so long as the foreign judgment is final and conclusive as between the same parties. |
| Godard v Gray | N/A | Yes | (1870) LR 6 QB 139 | England | Cited for the principle that a foreign judgment is conclusive as to any matter thereby adjudicated upon and cannot be impeached for any error, whether of fact or of law. |
| Grant v Easton | N/A | Yes | (1883) 13 QBD 302 | England | Cited for the principle that an application for summary judgment may be made on the ground that the defendant has no defence to the claim. |
| Carl Zeiss Stiftung v Rayner & Keeler Ltd (No 2) | N/A | Yes | [1967] 1 AC 853 | England | Cited for the principle that the treatment of the judgment by the foreign tribunal as res judicata is important in assessing the finality of the foreign judgment. |
| Nouvion v Freeman | House of Lords | No | (1889) 15 App Cas 1 | England | Cited to distinguish the present case from one where the foreign judgment was not final because the defendant could re-litigate the case on the merits in plenary proceedings. |
| Vanquelin v Bouard | Court of Common Pleas | Yes | (1863) 15 CB (NS) 341; 143 ER 817 | England | Cited for the principle that a judgment of a foreign court of competent jurisdiction is valid and may be the foundation of an action, though subject to the contingency that the party against whom the judgment is obtained might cause it to be vacated or set aside. |
| Schnabel v Lui | Supreme Court of New South Wales | Yes | [2002] NSWSC 15 | Australia | Cited for the principle that the test of finality is how the foreign jurisdiction treats the judgment and that the ability to apply to have a judgment set aside is immaterial. |
| Hawley & Hazel Chemical Co (S) Pte Ltd v Szu Ming Trading Pte Ltd | High Court | No | [2008] SGHC 13 | Singapore | Cited in argument regarding equitable set-off, but distinguished by the court. |
13. Applicable Rules
| Rule Name |
|---|
| No applicable rules |
14. Applicable Statutes
| Statute Name | Jurisdiction |
|---|---|
| Code of Civil Procedure (Act No 109 of June 26, 1996) | Japan |
15. Key Terms and Keywords
15.1 Key Terms
- Foreign judgment
- Enforcement
- Finality
- Public policy
- Equitable set-off
- Re-trial
- Res judicata
15.2 Keywords
- foreign judgment
- enforcement
- singapore
- japan
- court
- judgment
17. Areas of Law
| Area Name | Relevance Score |
|---|---|
| Enforcement of Foreign Judgments | 95 |
| Summary Judgement | 60 |
| Japanese Law | 40 |
| Asset Recovery | 30 |
| Breach of Contract | 25 |
| Contract Law | 20 |
| Arbitration | 15 |
16. Subjects
- Civil Litigation
- International Law